Relay Therapeutics, Inc. (RLAY) Business

Item 1. Business.

Overview

We are a clinical-stage, small molecule precision medicine company developing potentially life-changing therapies for patients living with cancer and genetic disease. Our Dynamo® platform integrates an array of leading-edge computational and experimental approaches designed to drug protein targets that have previously been intractable or inadequately addressed.

Precision medicine emerged as an approach for disease treatment as the understanding of the link between genetic alterations, protein dysfunction and diseases evolved. Precision medicine aims to specifically and potently drug genetically validated target proteins (i.e., genetic variants potentially implicated in biology of disease). However, some target proteins thus far have been intractable or inadequately addressed using conventional drug discovery tools. While conventional approaches are well-suited to solving some drug discovery problems such as orthosteric site kinase inhibitors, their reliance on static images of protein fragments limits their ability to gain accurate insights into the dynamic behavior of proteins in their natural state, which in turn limits their ability to discover medicines with exquisite specificity. Our approach pivots the understanding of protein targets from the industry-standard, static view, to a novel paradigm based on fundamental insights into protein motion. We then apply these novel insights into protein motion to drug discovery and design, which we term Motion-Based Drug Design®.

We have deployed our technology platform to build a pipeline of product candidates to address targets in precision medicine where there is clear evidence linking target proteins to disease and where molecular diagnostics can unambiguously identify relevant patients for treatment. We believe this approach will increase the likelihood of successfully translating a specific pharmacological mechanism into clinical benefit.

We are advancing a pipeline of medicine candidates to address targets in precision oncology and genetic disease, including zovegalisib (RLY-2608), our lead product candidate discussed below.

Zovegalisib (RLY-2608). Zovegalisib is the first known allosteric, pan-mutant and isoform-selective phosphoinostide 3 kinase alpha, or PI3Kα, inhibitor in clinical development. It is the lead program in our efforts to discover and develop mutant selective inhibitors of PI3Kα.

•
Breast Cancer and Solid Tumors

•
ReDiscover Trial. In December 2021, we dosed the first patient in a first-in-human clinical trial for zovegalisib, or the ReDiscover Trial. Since then, we have predominantly focused on evaluating zovegalisib in combination with

4

fulvestrant for patients with HR+, HER2–, PI3Kα-mutated, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. We are also advancing triplet combination arms with zovegalisib, fulvestrant and cyclin dependent kinase 4/6, or CDK 4/6, inhibitors, or atirmociclib, the investigative selective-CDK4 inhibitor from Pfizer Inc., or Pfizer. In the second quarter of 2025, we initiated a global Phase 3 registrational study, or the ReDiscover-2 Trial, which is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of zovegalisib plus fulvestrant in PI3Kα-mutated, HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer patients previously treated with a CDK4/6 inhibitor. The comparator arm in the ReDiscover-2 Trial is capivasertib plus fulvestrant. In February 2026, we announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, granted Breakthrough Therapy designation to zovegalisib in combination with fulvestrant for the treatment of adults with PIK3CA mutant HR+/HER2- locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer following recurrence or progression on or after treatment with a CDK4/6 inhibitor.

•
Clinical Data. In June 2025, we announced updated interim clinical data for the zovegalisib plus fulvestrant arm of the ReDiscover Trial with a data cut-off date of March 26, 2025, and in December 2025, we announced an efficacy subset analysis of interim clinical data for zovegalisib at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025 with a data cut-off date of October 15, 2025. These interim clinical data are discussed further below in "Our Product Pipeline and Programs —Our Lead Product Candidate – Breast Cancer and Solid Tumors - Interim Clinical Data." We believe that while the clinical data from the ReDiscover Trial disclosed to date are preliminary, the data suggest differentiated interim efficacy signals in the specified patient population and support selective target engagement across doses and mutation types with an encouraging interim safety and tolerability profile.

•
Vascular Anomalies

•
ReInspire Trial. In the first quarter of 2025, we initiated the global Phase 1/2 clinical trial for zovegalisib in patients with PIK3CA-related overgrowth spectrum, or PROS, and vascular anomalies driven by PIK3CA mutations, or the ReInspire Trial. Enrollment is continuing in this clinical trial.

In addition to the programs mentioned above, we are progressing our NRAS-selective inhibitor, RLY-8161, to address NRAS-mutated solid tumors as well as our non-inhibitory chaperone for Fabry disease. We are also advancing early-stage discovery programs across both precision oncology and genetic diseases.

Our Strategy

Our mission is to leverage unique insights into protein motion to transform the lives of patients suffering from debilitating and life-threatening diseases through the discovery, development and commercialization of small molecule therapies. We believe that, by placing protein motion at the heart of Motion-Based Drug Design discovery, our unique Dynamo® platform has the potential to address previously intractable or inadequately addressed precision medicine targets. To accomplish this, we have built a team that shares our commitment to patients and we intend to rapidly advance our precision medicine pipeline of product candidates with a focus on the highest value opportunities. The key elements of our strategy are to:

Rapidly advance our PI3Kα franchise and other programs through clinical development with the goal of reaching as many patients as possible. We believe that zovegalisib has the potential to address a significant portion of patients globally with HR+, HER2- breast cancer with a PI3Kα mutation, one of the largest patient populations for a precision oncology medicine. We initiated the Phase 3 ReDiscover-2 Trial in the second quarter of 2025 and continue to prioritize development of the zovegalisib doublet and triplet combinations with the aim of reaching breast cancer patients across both CDK4/6-experienced and -naïve settings. Additionally, in the first quarter of 2025, we advanced zovegalisib in vascular anomalies through the initiation of our ReInspire Trial, expanding our PI3Kα franchise to genetic disease. We plan to continue to conduct our clinical studies in genetically-defined patient populations. If we are successful in generating clinically meaningful and differentiated data for our programs, we plan to meet with regulatory authorities to discuss potential approval pathways.

Harness the insights and data generated from our drug discovery platform against intractable or inadequately addressed precision medicine targets, with current focus on oncology and genetic diseases. We are committed to deploying our Dynamo® platform against genetically validated targets, taking on some of the toughest technical drug discovery challenges and creating novel medicines against those targets that can rapidly attain clinical proof-of-concept and address significant unmet medical needs. Our focus is on precision oncology where there are clear genetic driver alterations in the tumor genome, and genetic disease where the causal mutations are present at birth.

Selectively enter into strategic partnerships to maximize the value of our platform and pipeline. We intend to build a fully integrated biopharmaceutical company and independently pursue the development and commercialization of our key product candidates. Given our potential to generate novel product candidates addressing a wide variety of therapeutic indications, we may enter into strategic partnerships around certain targets, product candidates, disease areas or geographies if we believe these collaborations or licenses could accelerate the development and commercialization of our product candidates and allow us to realize additional potential in our product candidates and our platform. For example, in June 2024, we entered into a global clinical trial collaboration with Pfizer for the development of zovegalisib in combination with fulvestrant and atirmociclib, Pfizer's investigative selective-CDK4 inhibitor, in patients with PI3Kα-mutated, HR+, HER2- metastatic breast cancer. Additionally, in December 2024, we entered into an exclusive global licensing agreement, or the Elevar Agreement, with Elevar Therapeutics, Inc., or Elevar, pursuant to which Elevar was granted global development and commercialization

5

rights for lirafugratinib (RLY-4008), our selective oral small molecule inhibitor of fibroblast growth factor receptor 2, or FGFR2. Outside of the Elevar Agreement, we currently retain full development and commercialization rights to our pipeline of active precision medicine programs.

Our Dynamo® Platform

Dynamo was built to capitalize on experimental and computational techniques to develop medicines against protein targets with greater specificity and potency. Using our Dynamo platform, we pivot from industry standard approaches, which are based on static structures and often rely on incomplete protein fragments, to a novel drug-discovery paradigm based on fundamental insights into protein motion, which we term Motion-Based Drug Design®. We leverage insights from our platform to develop novel, motion-based hypotheses for how to drug target proteins. We can then more rapidly identify and optimize effective lead compounds by integrating powerful experimental and computational tools to sample a much broader range of chemical space than is possible using conventional approaches, which are labor intensive and require significant experimental effort.

Our platform integrates a broad and tailored array of leading edge experimental and computational approaches to gain fundamental insights into protein function. We deploy the power of our Dynamo platform in three key phases of Motion-Based Drug Design discovery. We first understand how to drug the protein by developing a detailed mechanistic understanding of the dynamic behavior of the target protein and by identifying pockets where binding of a small molecule can impact protein function, which allows us to generate a target modulation hypothesis. Our platform then aids in efficient hit identification, or the identification of chemical starting points through an integrated system of experimental and virtual screens. This enables rapid lead optimization until a development candidate is selected by computationally prioritizing compounds for experimental evaluation. As each cycle generates new learnings for both our team and our underlying machine learning models, our successful iteration of this process continuously improves our understanding of protein motion which leads to a more effective and efficient drug discovery process.

Our Product Pipeline and Programs

While our Dynamo platform could potentially be applied to a wide range of disease-associated protein targets, we focus on precision medicine targets, currently specifically in oncology and genetic diseases, for which alterations in specific genes are known to cause disease. The genetic diseases we pursue include cancers with clear genetic driver alterations in the tumor genome, as well as monogenic diseases where the causal mutations are present at birth.

See "—Overview" above for a table that summarizes our current portfolio of product candidates and programs.

Our Lead Product Candidate

Our lead product candidate in clinical development, zovegalisib, is the first known investigational allosteric, pan-mutant and isoform-selective inhibitor of PI3Kα, which is discussed further below.

Overview

Zovegalisib is the lead program in our efforts to discover and develop mutant selective inhibitors of PI3Kα. PI3Kα is the most frequently mutated kinase in all cancers and all vascular anomalies. Traditionally, the development of PI3Kα inhibitors has focused on the active, or orthosteric, site. The therapeutic index of orthosteric inhibitors is limited by the lack of clinically meaningful selectivity for mutant versus wild-type PI3Kα and off-isoform activity. Toxicity related to inhibition of wild-type PI3Kα and other PI3K isoforms results in sub-optimal inhibition of mutant PI3Kα with reductions in dose intensity and frequent discontinuation. The Dynamo® platform enabled the discovery of zovegalisib, what we believe to be the first known allosteric, pan-mutant, and isoform-selective PI3Kα inhibitor designed to overcome these limitations. By solving the full-length cryo-electron microscopy, or Cryo-EM, structure of PI3Kα and performing computational long time-scale molecular dynamic simulations to elucidate conformational differences between wild-type and mutant PI3Kα, we were able to leverage these insights to support the design of zovegalisib.

We dosed the first patient in the ReDiscover Trial in December 2021. Since then, we have predominantly focused on evaluating zovegalisib in combination with fulvestrant for patients with HR+, HER2–, PI3Kα-mutated, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. We are also advancing triplet combination arms with zovegalisib, fulvestrant and CDK 4/6 inhibitors or atirmociclib, the investigative selective-CDK4 inhibitor from Pfizer. In the second quarter of 2025, we initiated the ReDiscover-2 Trial, which is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of zovegalisib plus fulvestrant in PI3Kα-mutated, HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer patients previously treated with a CDK4/6 inhibitor. The comparator arm in the ReDiscover-2 Trial is capivasertib plus fulvestrant. In February 2026, we announced that the FDA granted Breakthrough Therapy designation to zovegalisib in combination with fulvestrant for the treatment of adults with PIK3CA mutant HR+/HER2- locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer following recurrence or progression on or after treatment with a CDK4/6 inhibitor.

6

We believe that while the interim clinical data from the ReDiscover Trial disclosed to date are preliminary, the data suggest differentiated interim efficacy signals in the specified patient population and support selective target engagement across doses and mutation types with an encouraging interim safety and tolerability profile. Zovegalisib interim clinical data are discussed in further detail below in "—Interim Clinical Data."

In addition to breast cancer, we have also advanced zovegalisib in genetic disease. In the first quarter of 2025, we initiated the ReInspire Trial for zovegalisib in patients with PROS and anomalies driven by PIK3CA mutations. Enrollment is continuing in this clinical trial.

We believe zovegalisib has the potential, if approved, to address a significant portion of the approximately 140,000 patients with HR+, HER2- breast cancer with a PI3Kα mutation per year in the United States and the estimated 170,000 patients with vascular anomalies driven by a PI3Kα mutation per year in the United States.

Limitations of current PI3Kα inhibitors

Traditionally, the development of PI3Kα inhibitors has focused on the active, or orthosteric site. This site and its location make selectivity for PI3Kα over other PI3K isoforms and for mutant PI3Kα over wild-type PI3Kα difficult, and they do not enable pan-mutant coverage. Though these existing inhibitors have shown clinical activity in breast cancer as both monotherapy and in combination with hormonal therapy and cell cycle therapy, as well as anecdotal monotherapy responses in patients with PI3Kα mutations in other tumor types, the therapeutic index of such orthosteric inhibitors is limited by the lack of clinically meaningful selectivity for mutant versus wild-type PI3Kα and off-isoform activity. Toxicity related to inhibition of wild-type PI3Kα, other PI3K isoforms, or other nodes in the PI3K pathway results in sub-optimal inhibition of mutant PI3Kα with reductions in dose intensity and frequent discontinuation. These agents are generally limited by high rates of severe hyperglycemia, which is an on-target toxicity, and by gastrointestinal toxicity, which may be related to inhibition of other PI3K family members, including PI3Kδ.

Zovegalisib, the first known investigational allosteric, pan-mutant, and isoform-selective PI3Kα inhibitor, was designed to overcome these limitations. (Figure 1)

Figure 1: Non-selective inhibition of the PI3Kα pathway leads to toxicity challenges.

1. EPIK-B5, SABCS 2025 #RF7-02; 2. FDA Prescribing Information; 3. per CAPItello-291 enrollment criteria; 4. Rash for alpelisib references the cumulative sum of rates of rash and rash maculo-papular from the EPIK-B5 study, and may include overlap. Rash for capivasertib references Cutaneous Adverse Reactions grouped term includes a number of preferred terms listed in FDA Prescribing Information; 5. Stomatitis for alpelisib references the cumulative sum of rates of stomatitis and mucosal inflammation from the EPIK-B5 study, and may include overlap; ReDiscover preliminary data as of 03/26/2025.

Note: These data are derived from different clinical trials at different points in time, with differences in molecule composition, trial design and patient populations. As a result, cross-trial comparisons cannot be made, and no head-to-head clinical trials have been conducted.

7

Our solution, zovegalisib

Given the existence of mutations in PI3Kα with different biological mechanisms underlying aberrant activity, we believe the broadest opportunity is through the development of "pan-mutant" inhibitors of PI3Kα. Addressing the challenge of mutant selectivity required us to express and then solve the structure of the full-length PI3Kα protein. This structure, which to our knowledge had previously not been solved, represented a technical challenge because PI3Kα is a membrane-bound protein. This type of protein is typically difficult both to purify in large quantities and to crystallize. Nonetheless, we were able to obtain the structure of full-length PI3Kα using Cryo-EM. The three-dimensional structure of PI3Kα was determined by collecting data from two-dimensional electron microscopic projections of thin layers of protein. The resulting three-dimensional protein structure provided us with fundamental insights into the mechanism of activation of PI3Kα and the impact of mutations on its function. The integration of these structural insights with a combination of experimental and computational techniques has led to zovegalisib, the first molecule derived from these efforts and the first known allosteric, pan-mutant and isoform-selective PI3Kα inhibitor in clinical development.

Breast Cancer and Solid Tumors

PI3Kα is the most frequently mutated kinase in all cancers, with oncogenic mutations detected in about 14% of patients with solid tumors. We believe zovegalisib has the potential to address a significant portion of the approximately 140,000 patients with HR+, HER2- breast cancer with a PI3Kα mutation per year in the United States, one of the largest patient populations for a precision oncology medicine.

Clinical Development

The ReDiscover Trial is designed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and preliminary antitumor activity of zovegalisib, and consists of three separate arms (Figure 2). Initial development began with the monotherapy arm assessing zovegalisib as a single agent for patients with unresectable or metastatic solid tumors with PI3Kα mutation. Current development efforts prioritize combination arms for patients with PI3Kα-mutant, HR+, HER2- locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer, including the doublet arm evaluating zovegalisib in combination with fulvestrant and the triplet arm evaluating triplet combinations with CDK4/6 inhibitors and selective CDK4 inhibitor, atirmociclib. Each arm has two parts, a dose escalation (part 1) to determine the maximum tolerated dose and/or recommended Phase 2 dose, followed by a dose expansion (part 2) to evaluate zovegalisib in genomically defined populations.

Figure 2: ReDiscover Trial design.

________

CCOC = clear cell ovarian cancer

We have also initiated the ReDiscover-2 Trial, which is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of zovegalisib plus fulvestrant in PI3Kα-mutated, HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer patients previously treated with a CDK4/6 inhibitor in either the adjuvant or metastatic setting (n=540). The comparator arm in the ReDiscover-2 Trial is capivasertib plus fulvestrant. The ReDiscover-2 Trial is a randomized, open-label, multicenter clinical trial (Figure 3). The Phase 3 dose in the ReDiscover-2 Trial is 400 mg twice daily fed. A positive food effect has been observed when zovegalisib was administered to patients in the fed state, which increased the exposure level of

8

zovegalisib compared to the fasted state. The 400 mg twice daily fed dose has been shown to achieve exposures similar to the 600 mg twice daily fasted dose, which was the dose used in the ReDiscover Trial expansion cohorts for which we have reported the interim clinical data described below.

Figure 3: Phase 3 ReDiscover-2 Trial.

__________

1. Disease progression during or within 1 year of completing adjuvant therapy; 2. Applies to chemotherapy administered in the advanced setting.

In February 2026, we announced that the FDA granted Breakthrough Therapy designation to zovegalisib in combination with fulvestrant for the treatment of adults with PIK3CA mutant HR+/HER2- locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer following recurrence or progression on or after treatment with a CDK4/6 inhibitor.

Interim Clinical Data

In June 2025, we announced updated interim clinical data for the zovegalisib plus fulvestrant arm of the ReDiscover Trial with a data cut-off date of March 26, 2025, or the June 2025 Data, and in December 2025, we announced a subset analysis of interim clinical data for zovegalisib with a data cut-off date of October 15, 2025, or the December 2025 Data.

We presented the June 2025 Data at the American Society of Clinical Oncology 2025 Annual Meeting. As of the March 26, 2025 data cut-off date, the zovegalisib and fulvestrant combination arm of the study had enrolled 118 patients with PI3Kα-mutated, HR+, HER2- locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer across all doses in both the dose escalation and dose expansion portions of the study, including 64 patients at 600 mg twice daily, or BID, administered in the fasted state, which reaches exposures comparable to our Phase 3 dose. Among these 64 patients, 31 had a kinase mutation and 33 had a non-kinase mutation. Twelve patients also had a PTEN or AKT co-mutation and were therefore excluded from the efficacy analysis, consistent with the planned pivotal population. All patients in the zovegalisib and fulvestrant combination arm across doses had received a significant level of prior therapy in the advanced setting, including at least one prior endocrine therapy and at least one prior CDK4/6 inhibitor. Among the 64 patients who received the 600 mg BID fasted dose, 44% of patients (n=28) had received two or more prior lines of therapy.

Among the 52 patients in the zovegalisib and fulvestrant combination arm who received the 600 mg BID fasted dose and did not have a PTEN or AKT co-mutation, as of the March 26, 2025 data cut-off date:

•
The median follow-up was 12.5 months;

•
The median progression free survival, or PFS, was 10.3 months for all patients and 11 months for second line, or 2L, patients;

o
For 2L patients, median PFS was 18.4 months for patients with kinase mutations and 8.5 months for patients with non-kinase mutations;

•
Clinical benefit rate, or CBR, was 67% across all patients (35 of 52 CBR-evaluable patients; CBR defined as the proportion of patients with complete response, partial response or stable disease for at least 24 weeks);

9

•
Among the 31 patients with measurable disease, 12 achieved a partial response, or PR (39% confirmed objective response rate, or ORR);

o
81% of patients experienced tumor reductions (25/31);

o
Among the 15 patients with measurable disease who had a kinase mutation, two thirds achieved a PR (67% confirmed ORR; n=10); and

o
Among the 15 patients who had received prior fulvestrant, 6 achieved a PR (40% confirmed ORR).

Zovegalisib in combination with fulvestrant was generally well tolerated in the 118 patients treated across all doses as of the March 26, 2025 data cut-off date. The overall tolerability profile consisted of mostly low-grade treatment-related adverse events, or TRAEs, that were manageable and reversible. Safety outcomes were generally as expected across dose levels based on exposure and consistent with mutant-selective PI3Kα inhibition. Among the 64 patients who received the 600 mg BID fasted dose, as of the March 26, 2025 data cut-off date:

•
The low rate of TRAE-related dose modifications allowed for 92% median dose intensity;

•
Only two patients discontinued treatment due to TRAEs (Grade 1 pruritis; Grade 1 nausea, loss of appetite);

•
The majority of hyperglycemia was Grade 1; only two patients (3%) experienced Grade 3 hyperglycemia; no Grade 4-5 hyperglycemia; and

•
Only 36% of patients experienced a Grade 3 TRAE; no Grade 4-5 TRAEs.

We presented the December 2025 Data at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025, which consisted of an efficacy subset analysis. As of the October 15, 2025 data cut-off date, among the 64 patients who received the 600 mg BID fasted dose, 45% of patients (n=29) had received two or more prior lines of therapy, 52% of patients (n=33) had received prior selective estrogen receptor degrader, or SERD, (includes fulvestrant or oral SERD), and 29% of patients (n=18) had detectable ESR1 mutations at baseline.

The total efficacy population for the December 2025 Data consisted of 52 zovegalisib and fulvestrant patients who received the 600 mg BID fasted dose and did not have a PTEN or AKT co-mutation. Median follow-up was 20.2 months as of the October 15, 2025 data cut-off date. The median PFS was 10.3 months for all patients. Among the total of 31 patients with measurable disease, ORR was 39%. For 2L patients, median PFS was 11.4 months and ORR was 47%. Efficacy was generally consistent across other subsets of patients. As of the October 15, 2025 data cut-off date, for patients who received prior SERD, median PFS was 11.4 months and ORR was 44% (7/16), and for patients who had a detectable ESR1 mutation at baseline, median PFS was 8.8 months and ORR was 60% (6/10).

As of the October 15, 2025 data cut-off date, the overall tolerability profile remained consistent with the June 2025 Data, with TRAEs that were mostly low-grade, manageable and reversible.

We believe that while the clinical data from the ReDiscover Trial disclosed to date are preliminary, the data suggest differentiated interim efficacy signals in the specified patient population and support selective target engagement across doses and mutation types with an encouraging interim safety and tolerability profile.

Vascular Anomalies

Vascular anomalies are a series of rare diseases that occur due to atypical development of lymphatic and/or blood vessels, which enlarge or form tangles, pockets or shunting vessels that cause abnormal blood flow. They can occur in different parts of the body, vary in severity and may cause symptoms such as pain, swelling, skin discoloration, limb asymmetry and functional limits. The anomalies typically grow over time, and, depending on what vessel(s) are involved, can become life-threatening. The primary vessel(s) involved determine the sub-type of anomaly, which can include venous malformations, cerebral cavernous malformations, lymphatic malformations and PIK3CA-related overgrowth spectrum.

PI3Kα is the most common driver mutation among these sub-types, causing an estimated 30-55% of these vascular anomalies. In the U.S., an estimated 170,000 people have one of these sub-types driven by a PI3Kα mutation. A mutant selective PI3Kα inhibitor provides the opportunity for greater target coverage, leading to the potential for improved efficacy and better chronic tolerability.

Clinical Development

In the first quarter of 2025, we initiated the ReInspire Trial, which is a global Phase 1/2 clinical trial designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of zovegalisib in adults and children with PROS and anomalies driven by PIK3CA mutation (Figure 4). The ReInspire Trial is a three-part trial consisting of a dose selection (part 1), a basket design with exploratory single-arm cohorts for various subpopulations of participants (part 2) and a randomized, double-blinded study vs. placebo (part 3).

10

Figure 4: Initial development plan for Part 1 and 2 of the ReInspire Trial.

Other Pipeline Programs

In addition to our lead product candidate, we are advancing additional programs across both precision oncology and genetic diseases. We are progressing our NRAS-selective inhibitor, RLY-8161, to address NRAS-mutated solid tumors as well as our non-inhibitory chaperone for Fabry disease. We are also advancing early-stage discovery programs across both precision oncology and genetic diseases. Our precision oncology programs leverage insights into protein conformational dynamics to address high-value, genetically validated oncogenes that previously have been intractable to, or inadequately addressed by, conventional drug-discovery approaches. With respect to our genetic disease programs, we are working to address genetically validated targets in monogenic diseases where genetic alterations lead to disease-causing defects in protein conformational dynamics.

NRAS-selective inhibitor (RLY-8161)

NRAS is a known oncogene driver that belongs to the RAS family of signaling proteins. It plays an important role in cell division, cell differentiation and programmed cell death. The NRAS protein is responsible for converting GTP to GDP and is turned “on” when it binds to GTP and “off” once the GTP is converted to GDP. When mutated, the NRAS gene creates NRAS proteins that are always “on”, which makes cells grow and divide uncontrollably and can lead to a number of cancers, including melanoma, colorectal and non-small-cell lung. In the U.S., an estimated 29,000 people are diagnosed each year with mutated NRAS solid tumors.

Existing approved and in-development treatments either target all RAS proteins (pan-RAS) or target other downstream parts of the pathway such as RAF and MEK, which can lead to significant off-target toxicity and limits efficacy. We have created what we believe to be the first NRAS-selective inhibitor, RLY-8161, which has been designed to address the liabilities of current pan-RAS inhibitors by only binding to NRAS, while sparing KRAS and HRAS.

Fabry disease

In Fabry disease, a defective gene, or GLA, prohibits the body from producing enough healthy versions of an enzyme called alpha-galactosidase A, or αGal, which is responsible for breaking down globotriaosylceramide, or Gb3, a fat-like substance. As a result, harmful levels of Gb3 accumulate in blood cells and tissues throughout the body, which can lead to a range of symptoms, including potentially life-threatening ones such as kidney failure, heart failure and stroke. In the U.S., approximately 10,000 people are estimated to have this rare, progressive genetic disorder.

We have created what we believe to be the first investigational non-inhibitory chaperone for Fabry disease, which is designed to stabilize the αGal protein without inhibiting its activity, thus enabling greater Gb3 clearance across organs. A non-inhibitory chaperone could potentially serve as a chronic treatment option for people with Fabry disease, either as a monotherapy or in combination with enzyme replacement therapy.

11

Discovery Programs

We are deploying our Dynamo platform to advance discovery stage programs across both precision oncology and genetic diseases. As with preclinical and clinical programs described above, our discovery programs leverage insights into protein conformational dynamics to address high-value, genetically validated disease-causing genes that previously have been intractable to, or inadequately addressed by, conventional drug-discovery approaches.

Our Partnered Program

Lirafugratinib

In December 2024, we entered into the Elevar Agreement with Elevar, pursuant to which Elevar was granted global development and commercialization rights for lirafugratinib, a potent, selective and oral small molecule inhibitor of FGFR2, a receptor tyrosine kinase that is frequently altered in certain cancers. Under the terms of the Elevar Agreement, Elevar assumed full responsibility for all further development activities, including submission of any new drug applications, or NDAs, all subsequent clinical development, and global commercialization for FGFR2-driven cholangiocarcinoma, or CCA and FGFR2-altered other solid tumors.

Competition

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapid innovation of new technologies, fierce competition and strong defense of intellectual property. While we believe that our platform and our knowledge, experience and scientific resources provide us with competitive advantages, we face competition from major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies and public and private research institutions, among others.

We compete in the segments of the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and other related markets that address experimentally and computationally driven structure-based drug design in cancer and genetic diseases. There are other companies focusing on structure-based drug design to develop therapies in the fields of cancer and other diseases. These companies include divisions of large pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies of various sizes. Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with currently approved therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future from segments of the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other related markets that pursue precision medicines. Key product features that would affect our ability to effectively compete with other therapeutics include the efficacy, safety and convenience of our products.

We believe principal competitive factors to our business include, among other things, the rich protein structural data sets we are able to generate, the power and accuracy of our computations and predictions, ability to integrate experimental and computational capabilities, ability to successfully transition research programs into clinical development, ability to raise capital, and the scalability of the platform, pipeline, and business.

While there are many pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that use some of the same tools that we use in our platform, we believe we compete favorably on the basis of these factors. The effort and investment required to develop a highly integrated experimental and computational platform similar to ours will hinder new entrants that are unable to invest the necessary capital and time and lack the breadth and depth of technical expertise required to develop competing capabilities.

Our competitors may obtain regulatory approval of their products more rapidly than we may or may obtain patent protection or other intellectual property rights that limit our ability to develop or commercialize our product candidates. Our competitors may also develop drugs that are more effective, more convenient, more widely used and less costly or have a better safety profile than our products and these competitors may also be more successful than us in manufacturing and marketing their products.

In addition, we will need to develop our product candidates in collaboration with diagnostic companies, and we will face competition from other companies in establishing these collaborations. Our competitors will also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific, management and commercial personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

Furthermore, we also face competition more broadly across the market for cost-effective and reimbursable treatments for cancer and genetic disease. The most common methods of treating patients with cancer are surgery, radiation and drug therapy, including chemotherapy, hormone therapy and targeted drug therapy or a combination of such methods. Similarly, there are a variety of available treatments for genetic diseases, like Fabry disease, which include enzyme replacement therapy, gene therapy, and oral targeted therapy. In many cases, these drugs are administered in combination to enhance efficacy. While our product candidates, if any are approved, may compete with these existing drug and other therapies, to the extent they are ultimately used in combination with or as an adjunct to these therapies, our product candidates may not be competitive with them. Some of these drugs are branded and subject to patent protection, and others are available on a generic basis. Insurers and other third-party payors may also encourage the use of generic products or specific branded products. We expect that if any of our product candidates are approved, they will be priced at a significant premium over competitive generic, including branded generic, products. As a result, obtaining market acceptance of, and gaining significant share of the market for, any of our product candidates that we successfully introduce to the market will pose challenges. In addition, many companies

12

are developing new therapeutics, and we cannot predict what the standard of care will be as our product candidates progress through clinical development.

Zovegalisib– Breast Cancer and Solid Tumors

We expect that zovegalisib will compete against approved medicines, Piqray (alpelisib), a non-selective PI3Kα inhibitor marketed by Novartis for the treatment of PIK3CA mutated HR+, HER2- advanced or metastatic breast cancer, Truqap (capivasertib), an AKT inhibitor marketed by AstraZeneca for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer with a PIK3CA, AKT1 or PTEN alteration, and Itovebi (inavolisib), a non-selective PI3Kα inhibitor marketed by Roche Holding AG through its subsidiary Genentech for the treatment of PIK3CA mutated HR+, HER2- advanced or metastatic breast cancer. We are aware of other companies developing therapeutics that target both wild-type and mutant PI3Kα, including, but not limited to, Celcuity Inc and Totus Medicines. In addition, Eli Lilly and Company and OnKure have clinical development programs for mutant-selective PI3Kα inhibitors.

Zovegalisib– Vascular Anomalies

We expect that zovegalisib will compete against the only approved systemic therapy medicine, Vijoice (alpelisib), a non-selective PI3Kα inhibitor marketed by Novartis for the treatment of PIK3CA-Related Overgrowth Spectrum (PROS), available under accelerated approval. There are no approved agents for any other vascular anomaly sub-types. We are aware of other companies developing therapies for vascular anomalies, including Kaken Pharmaceutical Company, which is developing an oral non-selective PI3Kα inhibitor for patients with refractory vascular anomalies, and Palvella Therapeutics, which is developing a topical mTOR inhibitor for patients with cutaneous manifestations of lymphatic and venous malformations.

NRAS-Selective Inhibitor (RLY-8161)

While there are currently no approved products that selectively target NRAS, there are therapeutic approaches that target other nodes in the RAS/MAPK pathway which we’d expect our NRAS-selective molecule to compete against. This includes pan-RAF and MEK inhibitors, which are often used in combination, such as Braftovi (encorafenib), a BRAF inhibitor indicated for use in combination with Mektovi (binimetinib), a MEK inhibitor, both marketed by Pfizer for the treatment of metastatic melanoma with a BRAF V600E or V600K mutation. Braftovi as a single agent is additionally recommended for use in certain cases of cutaneous melanoma by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, though has not received regulatory approval. There are also clinical stage pan-RAS molecules in development, including Revolution Medicines RMC-6236.

Fabry Disease

We expect our non-inhibitory chaperone for Fabry disease to compete against Galafold (migalastat), an αGal chaperone marketed by Amicus Therapeutics for the treatment of Fabry disease with an amenable galactosidase alpha gene variant, as well as approved enzyme replacement therapies for Fabry disease including Fabrazyme (agalsidase beta), marketed by Sanofi, Replagal (agalsidase alfa), marketed by Takeda, and Elfabrio (pegunigalsidase alfa-iwxj), marketed by Protalix Biotherapeutics.

Our Collaborations

License Agreements and Strategic Collaborations

Collaboration and License Agreement with D. E. Shaw Research, LLC

On August 17, 2016, we entered into a Collaboration and License Agreement with D. E. Shaw Research, which was amended to extend the term and otherwise modify certain of the provisions thereof. We refer to this agreement, as amended and restated from time to time, as the DESRES Agreement. Under the DESRES Agreement, we agreed to collaborate with D. E. Shaw Research to research certain biological targets using computational modeling with an aim to develop and commercialize compounds and products directed to such targets. D. E. Shaw Research has no involvement with the clinical development or potential commercialization of these compounds and products, regardless of any co-ownership rights pursuant to the terms of the DESRES Agreement, and instead receives solely milestone and royalty payments as described below. The initial research term under the DESRES Agreement ended on August 16, 2025, and we are not currently collaborating with D.E. Shaw Research on any of our active preclinical programs.

Under the DESRES Agreement, Category 1 Targets are targets that, among other things, we collaborated, or intended to collaborate, on with D. E. Shaw Research, D. E. Shaw Research has exclusivity obligations with respect to, and we may owe royalties and other milestone payments on. The targets associated with all of our current programs in clinical development are Category 1 Targets under the DESRES Agreement.

Work product that we jointly developed with D. E. Shaw Research was initially co-owned with them. We have the right to have patents claiming certain product candidates assigned to us upon issuance of those patents. For each Category 1 Target, there is a limit to the number of core compounds and total compounds, including derivatives of core compounds, that can be designated as solely owned by us,

13

subject to certain adjustments. Each of we and D. E. Shaw Research grants to the other a perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive license for jointly held intellectual property, subject to certain exclusions.

During the initial research term, D. E. Shaw Research was restricted from researching any Category 1 Target (or granting certain rights with respect to such target) with the aim of pursuing any compound designed to interact with or bind to such Category 1 Target, subject to some exceptions. Following the end of the initial research term, D. E. Shaw Research is similarly restricted with respect to any target that was a Category 1 Target at the end of the initial research term, subject to some exceptions. However, D. E. Shaw Research is not bound by such exclusivity provisions with respect to a particular Category 1 Target if we, and parties acting on our behalf, stop using commercially reasonable efforts to research, develop or commercialize any products against such Category 1 Target. Further, D. E. Shaw Research will be released from such exclusivity obligations with respect to a particular Category 1 Target if, at least 24 months after the end of the initial research term, D. E. Shaw Research informs us that D. E. Shaw Research will forgo all future payments with respect to such Category 1 Target.

Through December 31, 2025, we have made cash payments to D. E. Shaw Research totaling $57.1 million in the aggregate. On a product-by-product basis, we have also agreed to pay D. E. Shaw Research milestone payments upon the achievement of certain development and regulatory milestone events for products we develop under the DESRES Agreement that are directed to a Category 1 Target or any target that was a Category 1 Target. Our PI3K, FGFR2, and NRAS programs are each directed to Category 1 Targets. Such payments for achievement of development and regulatory milestones total up to $7.3 million in the aggregate for each of the first three products we develop, and up to $6.3 million in the aggregate for each product we develop after the first three.

Additionally, we have agreed to pay D. E. Shaw Research, on a product-by-product basis, with respect to products directed to Category 1 Targets or any target that was a Category 1 Target, royalties in the low single digits on worldwide net sales of products that we commercialize directed to the targets selected for development under the DESRES Agreement, subject to certain reductions. Royalties are payable on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis until the later of twelve years after first commercial sale in such country or the expiration of all applicable regulatory exclusivities in such country. On a product-by-product basis, we also agreed to pay D. E. Shaw Research sales milestone payments up to $36.0 million in the aggregate based on sales of each product directed to a Category 1 Target or any target that was a Category 1 Target. Further, if we enter into transactions granting third parties rights to a Category 1 Target or a compound or product directed to a Category 1 Target or any target that was a Category 1 Target such as our licensing arrangement with Elevar for lirafugratinib discussed below, but subject to certain exclusions, we will share with D. E. Shaw Research a percentage of the proceeds of such transactions ranging from the low- to high-single digits, depending on the stage of development of compounds or products directed to such target at the time we enter into such transaction. We also paid an annual collaboration fee during the initial research term.

Unless earlier terminated, the DESRES Agreement will continue on a target-by-target basis until all payment obligations have expired. D. E. Shaw Research has the right to terminate the DESRES Agreement due to non-payment. We and D. E. Shaw Research each have the right to terminate the DESRES Agreement due to an uncured material breach by the other party, or in the event the other party becomes insolvent or enters into bankruptcy or dissolution proceedings. Our payment obligations to D. E. Shaw Research survive termination of the DESRES Agreement. If D. E. Shaw Research terminates the DESRES Agreement, the exclusivity obligations will terminate. If we terminate the DESRES Agreement, D. E. Shaw Research remains bound by its exclusivity obligations with respect to certain targets until, on a target-by-target basis, there are no further payment obligations due to D. E. Shaw Research in respect of such targets.

Exclusive Global Licensing Agreement with Elevar

On December 2, 2024, we entered into the Elevar Agreement. Pursuant to the Elevar Agreement, Elevar was granted global development and commercialization rights for lirafugratinib. Elevar is responsible for all further development activities and global commercialization for lirafugratinib in FGFR2-driven CCA and FGFR2-altered other solid tumors.

Collaboration and License Agreement with Genentech

On December 11, 2020, we entered into a Collaboration and License Agreement with Genentech, Inc. and F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, collectively referred to as Genentech, which was amended on February 2, 2022, to modify certain terms thereof. We refer to this agreement, as amended from time to time, as the Genentech Agreement. Pursuant to the Genentech Agreement, we and Genentech collaborated on the development and commercialization of RLY-1971, our inhibitor of SRC homology region 2 domain containing phosphatase 2 (now referred to as migoprotafib, or GDC-1971), or the Genentech Agreement.

Under the terms of the Genentech Agreement, we received $75.0 million in an upfront payment in 2021, as well as $45.0 million in milestone payments from Genentech as of December 31, 2025. Genentech elected to terminate the Genentech Agreement without cause, effective as of January 7, 2025. As a result of the termination of the Genentech Agreement, the parties no longer have any development or commercialization obligations and the licenses that we granted to Genentech pursuant to the Genentech Agreement ceased to be in effect. As of the termination date, we are no longer entitled to receive any further milestones or other payments under the Genentech Agreement. We will not continue development of migoprotafib.

14

Other Collaborations

While we have invested extensively in our in-house capabilities and know-how, we selectively work with key collaborators and field experts on certain emerging experimental and computational tools and techniques we use in our drug discovery process.

In June 2024, we entered into a global clinical trial collaboration with Pfizer for the development of zovegalisib in combination with fulvestrant and atirmociclib, Pfizer's investigative selective-CDK4 inhibitor, in patients with PI3Kα-mutated, HR+, HER2- metastatic breast cancer.

Intellectual Property

We seek to protect the intellectual property and proprietary technology that we consider important to our business, including by pursuing patent applications that cover our product candidates and methods of using the same, as well as any other relevant inventions and improvements that we believe to be commercially important to the development of our business. We also rely on trade secrets, know-how and continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our proprietary and intellectual property position. Our commercial success depends, in part, on our ability to obtain, maintain, enforce and protect our intellectual property and other proprietary rights for the technology, inventions and improvements we consider important to our business, and to defend any patents we may own or in-license in the future, prevent others from infringing any patents we may own or in-license in the future, preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets, and operate without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the valid and enforceable patents and proprietary rights of third parties.

As with other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, our ability to maintain and solidify our proprietary and intellectual property position for our product candidates and technologies will depend on our success in obtaining effective patent claims and enforcing those claims if granted. However, our pending provisional and PCT patent applications, and any patent applications that we may in the future file or license from third parties, may not result in the issuance of patents and any issued patents we may obtain do not guarantee us the right to practice our technology or commercialize our product candidates. We also cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be allowed or enforced in any patents we may own or in-license in the future. Any issued patents that we currently own or may own or in-license in the future may be challenged, invalidated, circumvented or have the scope of their claims narrowed. In addition, because of the extensive time required for clinical development and regulatory review of a product candidate we may develop, it is possible that, before any of our product candidates can be commercialized, any related patent may expire or remain in force for only a short period following commercialization, thereby limiting the protection such patent would afford the respective product and any competitive advantage such patent may provide.

The term of individual patents depends upon the date of filing of the patent application, the date of patent issuance and the legal term of patents in the countries in which they are obtained. In most countries, including the United States, the patent term is 20 years from the earliest filing date of a non-provisional patent application. In the United States, a patent’s term may be lengthened by patent term adjustment, which compensates a patentee for administrative delays by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, in examining and granting a patent, or may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over an earlier expiring patent. The term of a patent claiming a new drug product may also be eligible for a limited patent term extension when FDA approval is granted, provided statutory and regulatory requirements are met. The restoration period granted on a patent covering a product is typically one-half the time between the effective date of a clinical investigation involving human beings is begun and the submission date of an application, plus the time between the submission date of an application and the ultimate approval date. The restoration period cannot be longer than five years, and the restoration period may not extend the patent term beyond 14 years from the date of FDA approval. Only one patent applicable to an approved product is eligible for the extension, and only those claims covering the approved product, a method for using it, or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. Additionally, the application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent in question. A patent that covers multiple products for which approval is sought can only be extended in connection with one of the approvals. The USPTO reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration in consultation with the FDA. In the future, if our product candidates receive approval by the FDA, we expect to apply for patent term extensions on one issued patent covering each of those products, depending upon the length of the clinical studies for each product and other factors. There can be no assurance that patents will issue from our current or future pending patent applications, or that we will benefit from any patent term extension or favorable adjustments to the terms of any patents we may own or in-license in the future. In addition, the actual protection afforded by a patent varies on a product-by-product basis, from country-to-country, and depends upon many factors, including the type of patent, the scope of its coverage, the availability of regulatory-related extensions, the availability of legal remedies in a particular country and the validity and enforceability of the patent. The patent term may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on our products for an adequate amount of time.

Zovegalisib

As of December 31, 2025, we co-owned with D.E. Shaw Research pending U.S. and foreign patent applications, covering our lead PI3K program, which are directed to the composition of matter for the drug candidates of the program, including zovegalisib, analogs thereof, as well as methods of making and using these compounds. Any U.S. or foreign patents that may issue from this patent family, if granted and all appropriate maintenance fees paid, would be scheduled to expire in 2041, excluding any additional term for patent term adjustment or patent term extension, if applicable. As of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we co-own with D.E. Shaw Research granted patents in Eurasia, Japan, Korea, Chile, and the United States covering the composition of matter of zovegalisib.

15

As of December 31, 2025, we wholly owned pending U.S. and foreign patent applications relating to zovegalisib isotopolog composition of matter, methods of treatment, solid forms and methods of manufacture. Any U.S. or foreign patents that may issue from this patent family, if granted and all appropriate maintenance fees paid, would be scheduled to expire in 2042, excluding any additional term for patent term adjustment or patent term extension, if applicable.

Lirafugratinib

As of December 31, 2025, we co-owned with D. E. Shaw Research pending U.S. and foreign patent applications which relate to our FGFR2 inhibitors. Any U.S. or foreign patents that may issue from this patent family, if granted and all appropriate maintenance fees paid, would be scheduled to expire in 2040, excluding any additional term for patent term adjustment or patent term extension, if applicable. As of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we own granted patents in Eurasia, Europe, Taiwan, Japan, Hong Kong, and the United States covering the composition of matter of lirafugratinib.

As of December 31, 2025, we wholly owned pending U.S. and foreign patent applications relating to lirafugratinib salts composition of matter, methods of treatment, solid forms and methods of manufacture. Any U.S. or foreign patents that may issue from this patent family, if granted and all appropriate maintenance fees paid, would be scheduled to expire in 2041, excluding any additional term for patent term adjustment or patent term extension, if applicable. As of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we own a granted patent in the United States covering solid forms of lirafugratinib.

As of December 31, 2025, Elevar Therapeutics, as the exclusive licensee of our FGFR2 inhibitor program, has the sole right and responsibility for the prosecution, maintenance, and enforcement of all of our solely-owned and jointly-owned (with D.E. Shaw Research) patents and patent applications directed to our FGFR2 inhibitor program. We retain certain reversion rights in the event Elevar terminates its license, or declines to prosecute claims specifically relating to lirafugratinib.

Patent prosecution is a lengthy process, during which the scope of the claims initially submitted for examination by the USPTO or other foreign jurisdiction are often significantly narrowed by the time they issue, if they issue at all. Any U.S. or foreign patent issuing from these provisional, PCT, or foreign patent applications (assuming they are timely converted into non-provisional applications, and such non-provisional applications are granted as issued patents) would be scheduled to expire twenty years from their earliest non-provisional priority filing date, excluding any additional term for patent term adjustment or patent term extension, and assuming national phase entries are timely made based upon the pending PCT application, and payment of all applicable maintenance or annuity fees. Any of our pending PCT patent applications are not eligible to become issued patents until, among other things, we file national stage patent applications within 30 months in the countries in which we seek patent protection. If we do not timely file any national stage patent applications, we may lose our priority date with respect to our PCT patent applications and any patent protection on the inventions disclosed in such PCT patent applications. Our provisional patent applications may never result in issued patents and are not eligible to become issued patents until, among other things, we file a non-provisional patent application and/or PCT patent application within 12 months of filing the related provisional patent application. If we do not timely file non-provisional patent applications, we may lose our priority date with respect to our provisional patent applications and any patent protection on the inventions disclosed in our provisional patent applications. While we intend to timely file non-provisional and national stage patent applications relating to our provisional and PCT patent applications, we cannot predict whether any of our current or future patent applications for any of our product candidates or technology, will issue as patents. If we do not successfully obtain patent protection, or, even if we do obtain patent protection, if the scope of the patent protection we, Genentech, or our potential licensors, obtain with respect to any of our product candidates or technology is not sufficiently broad, we will be unable to prevent others from using our technology or from developing or commercializing technology and products similar or identical to ours or other competing products and technologies.

In addition to patent applications, we rely on unpatented trade secrets, know-how and continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our competitive position. However, trade secrets and confidential know-how are difficult to protect. In particular, we anticipate that with respect to the building of our compound library, our trade secrets and know-how will over time be disseminated within the industry through independent development and public presentations describing the methodology. We seek to protect our proprietary information, in part, by executing confidentiality agreements with our collaborators and scientific advisors and non-competition, non-solicitation, confidentiality and invention assignment agreements with our employees and consultants. We have also executed agreements requiring assignment of inventions with selected consultants, scientific advisors and collaborators. The confidentiality agreements we enter into are designed to protect our proprietary information and the agreements or clauses requiring assignment of inventions to us are designed to grant us ownership of technologies that are developed through our relationship with the respective counterparty. We cannot guarantee that we will have executed such agreements with all applicable employees and contractors, or that these agreements will afford us adequate protection of our intellectual property and proprietary information rights. In addition, our trade secrets and/or confidential know-how may become known or be independently developed by a third party or misused by any collaborator to whom we disclose such information. These agreements may also be breached, and we may not have an adequate remedy for any such breach. Despite any measures taken to protect our intellectual property, unauthorized parties may attempt to copy aspects of our products or to obtain or use information that we regard as proprietary. Although we take steps to protect our proprietary information, third parties may independently develop the same or similar proprietary information or may otherwise gain access to our proprietary information. As a result, we may be unable to meaningfully protect our trade secrets and proprietary information. For more information regarding the risks related to our intellectual property, please see "Risk Factors—Risks Related to our Intellectual Property."

16

Commercialization

Subject to receiving marketing approvals, we expect to commence commercialization activities by building a focused sales and marketing organization in the United States to sell our products. We believe that such an organization will be able to address the community of oncologists and genetic disease specialists who are the key specialists in treating the patient populations for which our product candidates are being developed. Outside the United States, we expect to enter into distribution and other marketing arrangements with third parties for any of our product candidates that obtain marketing approval.

We also plan to build a marketing and sales management organization to create and implement marketing strategies for any products that we market through our own sales organization and to oversee and support our sales force. The responsibilities of the marketing organization would include developing educational initiatives with respect to approved products and establishing relationships with researchers and practitioners in relevant fields of medicine.

Manufacturing

We do not have any manufacturing facilities or personnel. We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates undergoing preclinical testing, as well as for clinical testing and commercial manufacture if our product candidates receive marketing approval.

All of our drug candidates are small molecules and are manufactured in synthetic processes from available or custom-made starting materials. The chemistry appears amenable to scale-up and we rely on the specialized equipment of third parties to manufacture our product candidates. We expect to continue to develop product candidates that can be produced cost-effectively at contract manufacturing facilities.

We generally expect to rely on third parties for the manufacture of companion diagnostics for our products, which are assays or tests to identify an appropriate patient population. Depending on the technology solutions we choose, we may rely on multiple third parties to manufacture and sell a single test.

Governmental Regulation

The FDA and other regulatory authorities at federal, state and local levels, as well as in foreign countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, import, export, safety, effectiveness, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, recordkeeping, approval, advertising, promotion, marketing, post-approval monitoring and post-approval reporting of drugs. We, along with our vendors, contract research organizations, or CROs, and contract manufacturers, are and will be required to navigate the various preclinical, clinical, manufacturing and commercial approval requirements of the governing regulatory agencies of the countries in which we wish to conduct studies or seek approval of our product candidates. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals of drugs and ensuring subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.

In the United States, where we are initially focusing our drug development, the FDA regulates drug products under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FD&C Act, as amended, its implementing regulations and other laws. If we fail to comply with applicable FDA or other requirements at any time with respect to product development, clinical testing, approval or any other legal requirements relating to product manufacture, processing, handling, storage, quality control, safety, marketing, advertising, promotion, packaging, labeling, export, import, distribution, or sale, we may become subject to administrative or judicial sanctions or other legal consequences. These sanctions or consequences could include, among other things, the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, issuance of clinical holds for ongoing studies, suspension or revocation of approved applications, warning or untitled letters, product withdrawals or recalls, product seizures, relabeling or repackaging, total or partial suspensions of manufacturing or distribution, injunctions, fines, civil penalties or criminal prosecution.

The process required by the FDA before our product candidates are approved as drugs for therapeutic indications and may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

•
completion of extensive preclinical studies in accordance with applicable regulations, including studies conducted in accordance with good laboratory practice, or GLP, requirements;

•
completion of the manufacture, under current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, conditions, of the drug substance and drug product that the sponsor intends to use in human clinical trials along with required analytical and stability testing;

•
submission to the FDA of an investigational new drug application, or IND, which must become effective before clinical trials may begin;

•
approval by an institutional review board, or IRB, or independent ethics committee at each clinical trial site before each trial may be initiated;

17

•
performance of adequate and well-controlled clinical trials in accordance with applicable IND regulations, good clinical practice, or GCP, requirements and other clinical trial-related regulations to establish the safety and efficacy of the investigational product for each proposed indication;

•
submission to the FDA of a New Drug Application, or an NDA;

•
a determination by the FDA within 60 days of its receipt of an NDA, to accept the filing for review;

•
satisfactory completion of one or more FDA pre-approval inspections of the manufacturing facility or facilities where the drug will be produced to assess compliance with cGMP requirements to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve the drug’s identity, strength, quality and purity;

•
potentially, satisfactory completion of FDA audit of the clinical trial sites that generated the data in support of the NDA;

•
payment of user fees for FDA review of the NDA; and

•
FDA review and approval of the NDA, including consideration of the views of any FDA advisory committee, prior to any commercial marketing or sale of the drug in the United States.

Preclinical studies and clinical trials for drugs

Before testing any drug in humans, the product candidate must undergo rigorous preclinical testing. Preclinical studies include laboratory evaluations of drug chemistry, formulation and stability, as well as in vitro and animal studies to assess safety and in some cases to establish the rationale for therapeutic use. The conduct of preclinical studies is subject to federal and state regulation, including GLP requirements for safety/toxicology studies. The results of the preclinical studies, together with manufacturing information and analytical data, must be submitted to the FDA as part of an IND. An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational product to humans and must become effective before clinical trials may begin. Some long-term preclinical testing may continue after the IND is submitted. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA, within the 30-day time period, raises concerns or questions about the conduct of the clinical trial, including concerns that human research subjects will be exposed to unreasonable health risks, and imposes a full or partial clinical hold. The FDA must notify the trial sponsor of the grounds for the hold and any identified deficiencies must be resolved before the clinical trial can begin. Submission of an IND may result in the FDA not allowing clinical trials to commence or not allowing clinical trials to commence on the terms originally specified in the IND. A clinical hold can also be imposed once a trial has already begun, thereby halting the trial until the deficiencies articulated by the FDA are corrected.

The clinical stage of development involves the administration of the product candidate to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of qualified investigators, who generally are physicians not employed by or under the trial sponsor’s control, in accordance with GCP requirements, which include the requirements that all research subjects provide their informed consent for their participation in any clinical trial. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the clinical trial, dosing procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria and the parameters and criteria to be used in monitoring safety and evaluating effectiveness. Each protocol, and any subsequent amendments to the protocol, must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Furthermore, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an IRB for each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted to ensure that the risks to individuals participating in the clinical trials are minimized and are reasonable compared to the anticipated benefits. The IRB also approves the informed consent form that must be provided to each clinical trial subject or his or her legal representative and must monitor the clinical trial until completed. The FDA, the IRB, or the trial sponsor may suspend or discontinue a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. There also are requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical trials and completed clinical trials to public registries. Information about clinical trials, including results for clinical trials other than Phase 1 investigations, must be submitted within specific timeframes for publication on www.ClinicalTrials.gov, a clinical trials database maintained by the National Institutes of Health, or NIH. Information related to the product, patient population, phase of investigation, study sites and investigators and other aspects of the clinical trial is made public as part of the registration of the clinical trial. Although sponsors are obligated to disclose the results of their clinical trials after completion, disclosure of the results can be delayed in some cases for up to two years after the date of completion of the trial. Failure to timely register a covered clinical study or to submit study results as provided for in the law can give rise to public notification of noncompliance, civil monetary penalties and also prevent the non-compliant party from receiving future grant funds from the federal government.

A sponsor who wishes to conduct a clinical trial outside of the United States may, but need not, obtain FDA authorization to conduct the clinical trial under an IND. If a foreign clinical trial is not conducted under an IND, the FDA will nevertheless accept the results of the study in support of an NDA if the study was conducted in accordance with GCP requirements, and the FDA is able to validate the data through an onsite inspection if deemed necessary.

18

Clinical trials to evaluate therapeutic indications to support NDAs for marketing approval are typically conducted in three sequential phases, which may overlap.

•
Phase 1—Phase 1 clinical trials involve initial introduction of the investigational product into healthy human volunteers or patients with the target disease or condition. These studies are typically designed to test the safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism and distribution of the investigational product in humans, excretion the side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, to gain early evidence of effectiveness.

•
Phase 2—Phase 2 clinical trials typically involve administration of the investigational product to a limited patient population with a specified disease or condition to evaluate the drug’s potential efficacy, to determine the optimal dosages and dosing schedule and to identify possible adverse side effects and safety risks.

•
Phase 3—Phase 3 clinical trials typically involve administration of the investigational product to an expanded patient population to further evaluate dosage, to provide statistically significant evidence of clinical efficacy and to further test for safety, generally at multiple geographically dispersed clinical trial sites. These clinical trials are intended to establish the overall risk/benefit ratio of the investigational product and to provide an adequate basis for product approval and physician labeling.

In March 2022, the FDA released a final guidance entitled "Expansion Cohorts: Use in First-In-Human Clinical Trials to Expedite Development of Oncology Drugs and Biologics," which outlines how drug developers can utilize an adaptive trial design commonly referred to as a seamless trial design in early stages of oncology drug development (i.e., the first-in-human clinical trial) to compress the traditional three phases of trials into one continuous trial called an expansion cohort trial. Information to support the design of individual expansion cohorts are included in IND applications and assessed by the FDA. Expansion cohort trials can potentially bring efficiency to drug development and reduce development costs and time.

Post-approval trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials or post-marketing studies, may be conducted after initial marketing approval. These trials are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication and are commonly intended to generate additional safety data regarding use of the product in a clinical setting. In certain instances, the FDA may mandate the performance of Phase 4 clinical trials as a condition of NDA approval.

Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials, among other information, must be submitted at least annually to the FDA. Written IND safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and the investigators fifteen days after the trial sponsor determines the information qualifies for reporting for serious and unexpected suspected adverse events, findings from other studies or animal or in vitro testing that suggest a significant risk for human volunteers and any clinically important increase in the rate of a serious suspected adverse reaction over that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure. The sponsor must also notify the FDA of any unexpected fatal or life-threatening suspected adverse reaction as soon as possible but in no case later than seven calendar days after the sponsor’s initial receipt of the information.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the product candidate and finalize a process for manufacturing the drug product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and manufacturers must develop, among other things, methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final drug product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

U.S. marketing approval for drugs

Assuming successful completion of the required clinical testing, the results of the preclinical studies and clinical trials, together with detailed information relating to the product’s chemistry, manufacture, controls and proposed labeling, among other things, are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA package requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. An NDA is a request for approval to market a new drug for one or more specified indications and must contain proof of the drug’s safety and efficacy for the requested indications. The marketing application is required to include both negative and ambiguous results of preclinical studies and clinical trials, as well as positive findings. Data may come from company-sponsored clinical trials intended to test the safety and efficacy of a product’s use or from a number of alternative sources, including studies initiated by investigators. To support marketing approval, the data submitted must be sufficient in quality and quantity to establish the safety and efficacy of the investigational product to the satisfaction of the FDA. The FDA must approve an NDA before a drug may be marketed in the United States.

The FDA reviews all submitted NDAs before it accepts them for filing and may request additional information rather than accepting the NDA for filing. The FDA must make a decision on accepting an NDA for filing within 60 days of receipt, and such decision could include a refusal to file by the FDA. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth substantive review of the NDA. The FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether the drug is safe and effective for the indications sought and whether the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packaged or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, quality and purity. Under the goals and polices agreed to by the FDA under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, the FDA targets ten

19

months, from the filing date, in which to complete its initial review of a new molecular entity NDA and respond to the applicant, and six months from the filing date of a new molecular entity NDA for priority review. The FDA does not always meet its PDUFA goal dates for standard or priority NDAs, and the review process is often extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification.

Further, under PDUFA, as amended, each NDA must be accompanied by a substantial user fee. The FDA adjusts the PDUFA user fees on an annual basis. Fee waivers or reductions are available in certain circumstances, including a waiver of the application fee for the first application filed by a small business. Additionally, no user fees are assessed on NDAs for products designated as orphan drugs, unless the product also includes a non-orphan indication.

The FDA also may require submission of a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, if it believes that a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy is necessary to ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh its risks. A REMS can include use of risk evaluation and mitigation strategies like medication guides, physician communication plans, assessment plans, and/or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries, or other risk-minimization tools.

The FDA may refer an application for a novel drug to an advisory committee. An advisory committee is a panel of independent experts, including clinicians and other scientific experts, which reviews, evaluates and provides a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions.

Before approving an NDA, the FDA typically will inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and are adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving an NDA, the FDA may inspect one or more clinical trial sites to assure compliance with GCP and other requirements and the integrity of the clinical data submitted to the FDA.

After evaluating the NDA and all related information, including the advisory committee recommendation, if any, and inspection reports regarding the manufacturing facilities and clinical trial sites, the FDA may issue an approval letter, or, in some cases, a complete response letter. A complete response letter generally contains a statement of specific conditions that must be met in order to secure final approval of the NDA and may require additional clinical or preclinical testing in order for the FDA to reconsider the application. Even with submission of this additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval. If and when those conditions have been met to the FDA’s satisfaction, the FDA will typically issue an approval letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications.

Even if the FDA approves a product, depending on the specific risk(s) to be addressed, it may limit the approved indications for use of the product, require that contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling, require that post-approval studies, including Phase 4 clinical trials, be conducted to further assess a drug’s safety after approval, require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the product after commercialization, or impose other conditions, including distribution and use restrictions or other risk management mechanisms under a REMS, which can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the product. The FDA may prevent or limit further marketing of a product based on the results of post-marketing studies or surveillance programs. After approval, some types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications, manufacturing changes, and additional labeling claims, are subject to further testing requirements and FDA review and approval.

With respect to oncology products, the FDA may review applications under Real-Time Oncology Review, or RTOR, established by the FDA’s Oncology Center of Excellence. RTOR, which allows an applicant to pre submit components of the application to allow the FDA to review clinical data before the complete filing is submitted, aims to explore a more efficient review process to ensure that safe and effective treatments are available to patients as early as possible, while maintaining and improving review quality. Drugs considered for review under RTOR must, among other things, be likely to demonstrate substantial improvements on a clinically relevant endpoint(s) over available therapy, and must have easily interpreted endpoints. In addition, no aspect of the application should be likely to require a longer review time, such as, for example, a requirement for a new REMS. To determine eligibility for RTOR, the FDA requires top-line efficacy and safety results from an applicant’s pivotal clinical trial(s), as well as completion of database lock for the clinical trial(s). The FDA will generally make a decision regarding acceptance into RTOR within twenty (20) business days of receipt of the request from the applicant. If an applicant is not accepted into RTOR, the applicant will follow routine application submission procedures.

Orphan drug designation and exclusivity

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or if it affects 200,000 or more individuals in the United States, there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making the product available in the United States for the disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process, though companies developing orphan products are eligible for certain incentives, including tax credits for qualified clinical testing and waiver of application fees.

20

If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to a seven-year period of marketing exclusivity during which the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same therapeutic agent for the same approved use or indication, except in limited circumstances, such as a subsequent product’s showing of clinical superiority over the product with orphan drug exclusivity or where the original applicant cannot produce sufficient quantities of product. Competitors, however, may receive approval of different therapeutic agents for the approved use or indication for which the orphan product has exclusivity or obtain approval for the same therapeutic agent for a different approved use or indication than that for which the orphan product has exclusivity. Orphan product exclusivity could block the approval of one of our products for seven years if a competitor obtains approval for the same therapeutic agent for the same approved use or indication before we do, unless we are able to demonstrate that our product is clinically superior. If an orphan designated product receives marketing approval for an indication broader than what is designated, it may not be entitled to orphan drug exclusivity. Further, orphan drug exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or the manufacturer of the approved product is unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.

Expedited development and review programs for drugs

The FDA maintains several programs intended to facilitate and expedite development and review of new drugs to address unmet medical needs in the treatment of serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions. These programs include Fast Track designation, Breakthrough Therapy designation, Priority Review and Accelerated Approval, and the purpose of these programs is to either expedite the development or review of important new drugs to get them to patients more quickly than standard FDA review timelines typically permit.

A new drug is eligible for Fast Track designation if it is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for such disease or condition. Fast Track designation provides increased opportunities for sponsor interactions with the FDA during preclinical and clinical development, in addition to the potential for rolling review once a marketing application is filed. Rolling review means that the agency may review portions of the marketing application before the sponsor submits the complete application. In addition, a new drug may be eligible for Breakthrough Therapy designation if it is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. Breakthrough Therapy designation provides all the features of Fast Track designation in addition to intensive guidance on an efficient drug development program beginning as early as Phase 1, and FDA organizational commitment to expedited development, including involvement of senior managers and experienced review staff in a cross-disciplinary review, where appropriate.

Any product submitted to the FDA for approval, including a product with Fast Track or Breakthrough Therapy designation, may also be eligible for additional FDA programs intended to expedite the review and approval process, including Priority Review designation and Accelerated Approval. A product is eligible for Priority Review, once an NDA or Biologics License Application is submitted, if the drug that is the subject of the marketing application has the potential to provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness in the treatment, diagnosis or prevention of a serious disease or condition. Under Priority Review, the FDA’s goal date to take action on the marketing application is six months compared to ten months for a standard review. Products are eligible for Accelerated Approval if they can be shown to have an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or an effect on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality, which is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity, or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments.

Accelerated Approval is usually contingent on a sponsor’s agreement to conduct additional post-approval studies to verify and describe the product’s clinical benefit. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require that a sponsor of a drug receiving Accelerated Approval perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing clinical trials with due diligence and, under the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act of 2022, or FDORA, the FDA is permitted to require, as appropriate, that such trials be underway prior to approval or within a specific time period after the date of approval for a product granted Accelerated Approval. Under FDORA, the FDA has increased authority for expedited procedures to withdraw approval of a drug or an indication approved if, for example, the confirmatory trial fails to verify the predicted clinical benefit of the product. In addition, for products being considered for Accelerated Approval, the FDA generally requires, unless otherwise informed by the agency, pre-approval of promotional materials, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product.

Even if a product qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or the time period for FDA review or approval may not be shortened. Furthermore, Fast Track designation, Breakthrough Therapy designation, Priority Review and Accelerated Approval do not change the scientific or medical standards for approval or the quality of evidence necessary to support approval, though they may expedite the development or review process.

Pediatric information and pediatric exclusivity

Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, as amended, certain NDAs and NDA supplements must contain data that can be used to assess the safety and efficacy of the drug for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. The FDA may grant deferrals for submission of pediatric data or full or partial waivers. The FD&C Act requires that a sponsor who is planning to submit a marketing application for a drug

21

that includes a new active ingredient, new indication, new dosage form, new dosing regimen or new route of administration submit an initial Pediatric Study Plan, or PSP, within 60 days of an end-of-Phase 2 meeting or, if there is no such meeting, as early as practicable before the initiation of the Phase 3 or Phase 2/3 study. The initial PSP must include an outline of the pediatric study or studies that the sponsor plans to conduct, including study objectives and design, age groups, relevant endpoints and statistical approach, or a justification for not including such detailed information, and any request for a deferral of pediatric assessments or a full or partial waiver of the requirement to provide data from pediatric studies along with supporting information. The FDA and the sponsor must reach an agreement on the PSP. A sponsor can submit amendments to an agreed-upon initial PSP at any time if changes to the pediatric plan need to be considered based on data collected from preclinical studies, early phase clinical trials and/or other clinical development programs. Additionally, for molecularly targeted cancer drugs, beginning after February 3, 2029, the FDA may require testing of certain novel single ingredient or combination regimens to yield clinically meaningful pediatric study data that is gathered using appropriate formulations for each age group for which the study is required, regarding dosing, safety, and preliminary efficacy to inform potential pediatric labeling.

A drug can also obtain pediatric market exclusivity in the United States. Pediatric exclusivity, if granted, adds six months to existing exclusivity periods and patent terms. This six-month exclusivity, which runs from the end of other exclusivity protection or patent term, may be granted based on the voluntary completion of a pediatric study in accordance with an FDA-issued "Written Request" for such a study, provided that at the time pediatric exclusivity is granted there is not less than nine months of term remaining.

U.S. post-approval requirements for drugs

Drugs manufactured or distributed pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to recordkeeping, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, reporting of adverse experiences with the product, complying with promotion and advertising requirements, which include restrictions on promoting products for unapproved uses or patient populations (known as "off-label use") and limitations on industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities. Although physicians may prescribe legally available products for off-label uses, manufacturers may not market or promote such uses. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability, including investigation by federal and state authorities. Prescription drug promotional materials must be submitted to the FDA in conjunction with their first use or first publication. Further, if there are any modifications to the drug, including changes in indications, labeling or manufacturing processes or facilities, the applicant may be required to submit and obtain FDA approval of a new NDA or NDA supplement, which may require the development of additional data or preclinical studies and clinical trials.

The FDA may impose a number of post-approval requirements as a condition of approval of an NDA. For example, the FDA may require post-market testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials, and surveillance to further assess and monitor the product’s safety and effectiveness after commercialization. In addition, drug manufacturers and their subcontractors involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drugs are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with ongoing regulatory requirements, including cGMPs, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements. Manufacturers and other parties involved in the drug supply chain for prescription drug products and those supplying products, ingredients, and components of them, must also comply with product tracking and tracing requirements, including electronic systems for identification and tracing, and are responsible for notifying the FDA of counterfeit, diverted, stolen and intentionally adulterated products or products that are otherwise unfit for distribution in the United States. Failure to comply with statutory and regulatory requirements may subject a manufacturer to legal or regulatory action, such as warning letters, suspension of manufacturing, product seizures, injunctions, civil penalties or criminal prosecution. There is also a continuing, annual prescription drug product program user fee.

Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information, requirements for post-market studies or clinical trials to assess new safety risks, or imposition of distribution or other restrictions under a REMS. Other potential consequences include, among other things:

•
restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, complete withdrawal of the product from the market or product recalls;

•
the issuance of safety alerts, Dear Healthcare Provider letters, press releases or other communications containing warnings or other safety information about the product;

•
fines, warning letters or holds on post-approval clinical trials;

•
refusal of the FDA to approve applications or supplements to approved applications, or suspension or revocation of product approvals;

•
product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products;

•
injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties; and

22

•
consent decrees, corporate integrity agreements, debarment or exclusion from federal healthcare programs; or mandated modification of promotional materials and labeling and issuance of corrective information.

From time to time, legislation is drafted, introduced, passed in Congress, and signed into law that could significantly change the statutory provisions governing the approval, manufacturing, and marketing of products regulated by the FDA. In addition to new legislation, FDA regulations, guidance, and policies are often revised or reinterpreted by the agency in ways that may significantly affect the manner in which pharmaceutical products are regulated and marketed.

Regulation of companion diagnostics

Companion diagnostics identify patients who are most likely to benefit from a particular therapeutic product; identify patients likely to be at increased risk for serious side effects as a result of treatment with a particular therapeutic product; or monitor response to treatment with a particular therapeutic product for the purpose of adjusting treatment to achieve improved safety or effectiveness. Companion diagnostics are regulated as medical devices by the FDA. In the United States, the FD&C Act, and its implementing regulations, and other federal and state statutes and regulations govern, among other things, medical device design and development, preclinical and clinical testing, premarket clearance or approval, registration and listing, manufacturing, labeling, storage, advertising and promotion, sales and distribution, export and import, and post-market surveillance. Unless an exemption or FDA exercise of enforcement discretion applies, diagnostic tests generally require marketing clearance or approval from the FDA prior to commercialization. The two primary types of FDA marketing authorization applicable to a medical device are clearance of a premarket notification, or 510(k), and approval of a premarket approval application, or PMA.

To obtain 510(k) clearance for a medical device, or for certain modifications to devices that have received 510(k) clearance, a manufacturer must submit a premarket notification demonstrating that the proposed device is substantially equivalent to a previously cleared 510(k) device or to a pre-amendment device that was in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976, or a predicate device, for which the FDA has not yet called for the submission of a PMA. In making a determination that the device is substantially equivalent to a predicate device, the FDA compares the proposed device to the predicate device and assesses whether the subject device is comparable to the predicate device with respect to intended use, technology, design and other features which could affect safety and effectiveness. If the FDA determines that the subject device is substantially equivalent to the predicate device, the subject device may be cleared for marketing. The 510(k) premarket notification pathway generally takes from three to twelve months from the date the application is completed, but can take significantly longer.

A PMA must be supported by valid scientific evidence, which typically requires extensive data, including technical, preclinical, clinical and manufacturing data, to demonstrate to the FDA’s satisfaction the safety and effectiveness of the device. For diagnostic tests, a PMA typically includes data regarding analytical and clinical validation studies. As part of its review of the PMA, the FDA will conduct a pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities to ensure compliance with the quality system regulation, or QSR, which requires manufacturers to follow design, testing, control, documentation and other quality assurance procedures. The FDA’s review of an initial PMA is required by statute to take between six to ten months, although the process typically takes longer, and may require several years to complete. If the FDA evaluations of both the PMA and the manufacturing facilities are favorable, the FDA will either issue an approval letter or an approvable letter, which usually contains a number of conditions that must be met in order to secure the final approval of the PMA. If the FDA’s evaluation of the PMA or manufacturing facilities is not favorable, the FDA will deny the approval of the PMA or issue a not approvable letter. A not approvable letter will outline the deficiencies in the application and, where practical, will identify what is necessary to make the PMA approvable. Once granted, PMA approval may be withdrawn by the FDA if compliance with post-approval requirements, conditions of approval or other regulatory standards is not maintained or problems are identified following initial marketing.

On July 31, 2014, the FDA issued a final guidance document addressing the development and approval process for "In Vitro Companion Diagnostic Devices." According to the guidance document, for novel therapeutic products that depend on the use of a diagnostic test and where the diagnostic device could be essential for the safe and effective use of the corresponding therapeutic product, the companion diagnostic device should be developed and approved or cleared contemporaneously with the therapeutic, although the FDA recognizes that there may be cases when contemporaneous development may not be possible. However, in cases where a drug cannot be used safely or effectively without the companion diagnostic, the FDA’s guidance indicates it will generally not approve the drug without the approval or clearance of the diagnostic device. The FDA also issued a draft guidance document in July 2016 setting forth the principles for co-development of an in vitro companion diagnostic device with a therapeutic product. The draft guidance describes principles to guide the development and contemporaneous marketing authorization for the therapeutic product and its corresponding in vitro companion diagnostic.

Once cleared or approved, the companion diagnostic device must adhere to post-marketing requirements including the requirements of the FDA’s QSR, adverse event reporting, recalls and corrections along with product marketing requirements and limitations. Like drug makers, companion diagnostic makers are subject to unannounced FDA inspections at any time during which the FDA will conduct an audit of the product(s) and the company’s facilities for compliance with its authorities.

23

Other regulatory matters

Manufacturing, sales, promotion and other activities of product candidates following product approval, where applicable, or commercialization are also subject to regulation by numerous regulatory authorities in the United States in addition to the FDA, which may include the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, other divisions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Justice, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, the Occupational Safety & Health Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency and state and local governments and governmental agencies.

Other healthcare laws

Pharmaceutical companies are subject to additional healthcare regulation and enforcement by the federal government and by authorities in the states and foreign jurisdictions in which they conduct their business that may constrain the financial arrangements and relationships through which we research, as well as sell, market and distribute any products for which we obtain marketing authorization. Such laws include, without limitation: state and federal anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, and transparency laws and regulations related to drug pricing and payments and other transfers of value made to physicians and other healthcare providers. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of such laws or any other governmental regulations that apply, we may be subject to penalties, including, without limitation, administrative, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, the curtailment or restructuring of operations, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs, and responsible individuals may be subject to imprisonment.

Insurance coverage and reimbursement

In the United States and markets in other countries, patients who are prescribed treatments for their conditions and providers performing the prescribed services generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the associated healthcare costs. Thus, even if a product candidate is approved, sales of the product will depend, in part, on the extent to which third-party payors, including government health programs in the United States such as Medicare and Medicaid, commercial health insurers and managed care organizations, provide coverage, and establish adequate reimbursement levels for, the product. In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement for new medicines are typically made by CMS, an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. CMS decides whether and to what extent a new medicine will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare and private payors tend to follow CMS to a substantial degree. No uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for drug products exists among third-party payors. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for drug products can differ significantly from payor to payor. The process for determining whether a third-party payor will provide coverage for a product may be separate from the process for setting the price or reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the product once coverage is approved. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged, examining the medical necessity, reviewing the cost-effectiveness of medical products and services and imposing controls to manage costs. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific products on an approved list, also known as a formulary, which might not include all of the approved products for a particular indication.

In order to secure coverage and reimbursement for any product that might be approved for sale, a company may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of the product, which will require additional expenditure above and beyond the costs required to obtain FDA or other comparable regulatory approvals. Additionally, companies may also need to provide discounts to purchasers, private health plans or government healthcare programs, and net prices for our products may also be reduced by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. Nonetheless, product candidates may not be considered medically necessary or cost effective. A decision by a third-party payor not to cover a product could reduce physician utilization once the product is approved and have a material adverse effect on sales, our operations and financial condition. Additionally, a third-party payor’s decision to provide coverage for a product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Further, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage and reimbursement for the product, and the level of coverage and reimbursement can differ significantly from payor to payor.

The containment of healthcare costs has become a priority of federal, state and foreign governments, and the prices of products have been a focus in this effort. Governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could further limit a company’s revenue generated from the sale of any approved products. Coverage policies and third-party payor reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products for which a company or its collaborators or licensees receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.

Current and future healthcare reform legislation

In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and likely will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system directed at broadening the availability of healthcare, improving the quality of healthcare, and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. For example, in 2010, the United States Congress enacted the Affordable

24

Care Act, or ACA, which, among other things, includes changes to the coverage and payment for products under government health care programs. The ACA includes provisions of importance to our potential product candidates that:

•
created an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports specified branded prescription drugs and biologic products, apportioned among these entities according to their market share in certain government healthcare programs;

•
expanded eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs, thereby potentially increasing a manufacturer’s Medicaid rebate liability;

•
expanded manufacturers’ rebate liability under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program;

•
expanded the types of entities eligible for the 340B drug discount program;

•
established the Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program by requiring manufacturers to provide point-of-sale-discounts off the negotiated price of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period as a condition for the manufacturers’ outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D; and

•
created a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. In August 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, included aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect in April 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2031 unless additional Congressional action is taken. In January 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years.

Due to the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, estimated budget deficit increases resulting from the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, and subsequent legislation, Medicare payments to providers were further reduced starting on January 1, 2025, however legislation has been introduced in the U.S. Congress that would, if enacted, reverse these payment reductions. In addition to provider payment cuts under Medicare, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 also eliminated the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, previously set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, effective January 1, 2024. These laws and regulations may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding available for healthcare providers and may otherwise affect the prices we may obtain for any of our product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval or the frequency with which any such product candidate is prescribed or used.

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or the IRA, was signed into law in August 2022. The IRA includes several provisions that could impact our business to varying degrees, including provisions that create a $2,000 out-of-pocket cap for Medicare Part D beneficiaries, impose new manufacturer financial liability on all drugs in Medicare Part D, allow the U.S. government to negotiate Medicare Part B and Part D pricing for certain high-cost drugs and biologics without generic or biosimilar competition, require companies to pay rebates to Medicare for drug prices that increase faster than inflation, and delay until January 1, 2032 the rebate rule that would require pass through of pharmacy benefit manager rebates to beneficiaries. Further, under the IRA, orphan drugs are exempted from the Medicare drug price negotiation program, but only if they have one orphan designation and for which the only approved indication is for that disease or condition. If a product receives multiple orphan designations or has multiple approved indications, it may not qualify for the orphan drug exemption. The implementation of the IRA is currently subject to ongoing litigation challenging the constitutionality of the IRA’s Medicare drug price negotiation program. Although the effects of the IRA on our business and the healthcare industry in general are not yet known, we are taking into consideration the potential impact of the IRA on our development and commercialization activities.

The Creating and Restoring Equal Access to Equivalent Samples Act (CREATES Act), was enacted in 2019 requiring sponsors of approved new drug applications and biologics license applications to provide sufficient quantities of product samples on commercially reasonable, market-based terms to entities developing generic drugs and biosimilar biological products. The law establishes a private right of action allowing developers to sue application holders that refuse to sell them product samples needed to support their applications. If we are required to provide product samples or allocate additional resources to respond to such requests or any legal challenges under this law, our business could be adversely impacted.

In addition, the Trump administration has taken and is expected to take executive and administrative action to reduce prescription drug costs. Although a number of these and other proposed measures may require authorization through additional legislation to become effective, and the Trump administration may reverse or otherwise change these previous measures, the current administration and Congress have indicated that they will continue to seek new legislative measures to control drug costs.

Outside the United States, ensuring coverage and adequate payment for a product also involves challenges. Pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to government control in many countries. Pricing negotiations with government authorities can extend well

25

beyond the receipt of regulatory approval for a product and may require a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of a product to other available therapies. The conduct of such a clinical trial could be expensive and result in delays in commercialization.

In the European Union, or EU, pricing and reimbursement schemes vary widely from country to country. Some countries provide that products may be marketed only after a reimbursement price has been agreed upon. Some countries may require the completion of additional studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies or so-called health technology assessments, in order to obtain reimbursement or pricing approval. For example, the EU provides options for its Member States to restrict the range of products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. EU Member States may approve a specific price for a product or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the product on the market. Other Member States allow companies to fix their own prices for products, but monitor and control prescription volumes and issue guidance to physicians to limit prescriptions. Recently, many countries in the EU have increased the amount of discounts required on pharmaceuticals and these efforts could continue as countries attempt to manage healthcare expenditures, especially in light of the severe fiscal and debt crises experienced by many countries in the EU. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription products, has become intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. Political, economic and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing negotiations, and pricing negotiations may continue after reimbursement has been obtained. Reference pricing used by various EU Member States, and parallel trade, i.e., arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced Member States, can further reduce prices. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any products, if approved in those countries.

Compliance with other federal and state laws or requirements; changing legal requirements

If any products that we may develop are made available to authorized users of the Federal Supply Schedule of the General Services Administration, additional laws and requirements apply. Products must meet applicable child-resistant packaging requirements under the U.S. Poison Prevention Packaging Act. Manufacturing, labeling, packaging, distribution, sales, promotion and other activities also are potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws, among other requirements to which we may be subject.

The distribution of pharmaceutical products is subject to additional requirements and regulations, including extensive recordkeeping, licensing, storage and security requirements intended to prevent the unauthorized sale of pharmaceutical products.

The failure to comply with any of these laws or regulatory requirements may subject firms to legal or regulatory action. Depending on the circumstances, failure to meet applicable regulatory requirements can result in criminal prosecution, fines or other penalties, injunctions, exclusion from federal healthcare programs, requests for recall, seizure of products, total or partial suspension of production, denial or withdrawal of product approvals, relabeling or repackaging, or refusal to allow a firm to enter into supply contracts, including government contracts. Any claim or action against us for violation of these laws, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. Prohibitions or restrictions on marketing, sales or withdrawal of future products marketed by us could materially affect our business in an adverse way.

Changes in regulations, statutes or the interpretation of existing regulations could impact our business in the future by requiring, for example: (i) changes to our manufacturing arrangements; (ii) additions or modifications to product labeling or packaging; (iii) the recall or discontinuation of our products; or (iv) additional recordkeeping requirements. If any such changes were to be imposed, they could adversely affect the operation of our business.

Other U.S. environmental, health and safety laws and regulations

We may be subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures and the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. From time to time and in the future, our operations may involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological materials, and may also produce hazardous waste products. Even if we contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and waste products, we cannot completely eliminate the risk of contamination or injury resulting from these materials. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from the use or disposal of our hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties for failure to comply with such laws and regulations.

We maintain workers’ compensation insurance to cover us for costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees, but this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. However, we do not maintain insurance for environmental liability or toxic tort claims that may be asserted against us.

In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. Current or future environmental laws and regulations may impair our research, development or production efforts. In addition, failure to comply with these laws and regulations may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.

26

Government regulation of drugs outside of the United States

To market any product outside of the United States, we would need to comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries regarding safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials, marketing authorization or identification of an alternate regulatory pathway, manufacturing, commercial sales and distribution of our products.

Clinical trial approval

In April 2014, the EU adopted the new Clinical Trials Regulation, (EU) No 536/2014 (Clinical Trials Regulation) which replaced the current Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC on January 31, 2022. The Clinical Trials Regulation is directly applicable in all the EU Member States (meaning no national implementing legislation is required). The Clinical Trials Regulation aims to simplify and streamline the approval of clinical trials in the EU. The main characteristics of the Clinical Trials Regulation include: a streamlined application procedure via a single-entry point, through the Clinical Trials Information System, or CTIS; a single set of documents to be prepared and submitted for the application, as well as simplified reporting procedures for clinical trial sponsors; and a harmonized procedure for the assessment of applications for clinical trials, which is divided in two parts. Part I is assessed by the competent authorities of all EU Member States in which an application for authorization of a clinical trial has been submitted (Member States concerned). Part II is assessed separately by each Member State concerned. Strict deadlines have been established for the assessment of clinical trial applications. The role of the relevant ethics committees in the assessment procedure continues to be governed by the national law of the concerned EU Member State, however, overall related timelines are defined by the Clinical Trials Regulation.

Drug Review and Approval

In the EU, medicinal products must be authorized for marketing by using either the centralized authorization procedure or national authorization procedures.

•
Centralized authorization procedure—If pursuing marketing authorization of a product candidate for a therapeutic indication under the centralized procedure, following the opining of the EMA’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, or, CHMP, the European Commission issues a single marketing authorization valid across the EU and in the additional Member States of the European Economic Area (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway). The centralized procedure is compulsory for human medicines derived from biotechnology processes, advanced therapy medicinal products (i.e. gene therapy, somatic cell therapy and tissue engineered products), products that contain a new active substance indicated for the treatment of certain diseases, such as HIV/AIDS, cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, diabetes, autoimmune diseases and other immune dysfunctions and viral diseases, and products designated as orphan medicines. For medicines that do not fall within these categories, an applicant has the option of submitting an application for a centralized marketing authorization to the EMA, as long as the medicine concerned contains a new active substance not yet authorized in the EU, is a significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovation, or if its authorization would be in the interest of public health in the EU. Under the centralized procedure the maximum timeframe for the evaluation of a marketing authorization application, or MAA, by the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, is 210 days, excluding clock stops, when additional written or oral information is to be provided by the applicant in response to questions asked by the CHMP. Where the CHMP gives a positive opinion, it provides the opinion together with supporting documentation to the European Commission, who makes the final decision to grant a marketing authorization, which is issued within 67 days of receipt of the EMA’s recommendation. Accelerated assessment might be granted by the CHMP in exceptional cases, when a medicinal product is expected to be of major public health interest, particularly from the point of view of therapeutic innovation. The timeframe for the evaluation of an MAA under the accelerated assessment procedure is 150 days, excluding clock stops, but it is possible that the CHMP can revert to the standard time limit for the centralized procedure if it considers that it is no longer appropriate to conduct an accelerated assessment.

•
National authorization procedures—There are also two other possible routes to authorize products for therapeutic indications in several countries, which are available for products that fall outside the scope of the centralized procedure:

•
Decentralized procedure—Using the decentralized procedure, an applicant may apply for simultaneous authorization in more than one EU country of medicinal products that have not yet been authorized in any EU country and that do not fall within the mandatory scope of the centralized procedure.

•
Mutual recognition procedure—In the mutual recognition procedure, a medicine is first authorized in one EU Member State, in accordance with the national procedures of that country. Following this, additional marketing authorizations can be sought from other EU countries in a procedure whereby the countries concerned recognize the validity of the original, national marketing authorization.

Periods of authorization and renewals

A marketing authorization has an initial validity for five years in principle. The marketing authorization may be renewed after five years on the basis of a re-evaluation of the risk-benefit balance by the EMA or by the competent authority of the EU Member State for a nationally

27

authorized product. Once subsequently definitively renewed, the marketing authorization shall be valid for an unlimited period, unless the European Commission or the national competent authority decides, on justified grounds relating to pharmacovigilance, to proceed with one additional five-year renewal period. Any authorization which is not followed by the actual placing of the medicinal product on the EU market (in the case of the centralized procedure) or on the market of the authorizing EU Member State for a nationally authorized product within three years after authorization, ceases to be valid (the so-called sunset clause).

Drug and market exclusivity

In the EU, innovative products for therapeutic indications that are authorized for marketing (i.e., reference products) qualify for eight years of data exclusivity and an additional two years of market exclusivity upon marketing authorization. The data exclusivity period prevents generic or biosimilar applicants from referencing the innovator’s preclinical and clinical trial data contained in the dossier of the reference product when applying for a generic or biosimilar marketing authorization in the EU during a period of eight years from the date on which the reference product was first authorized in the EU. The market exclusivity period prevents a successful generic or biosimilar applicant from commercializing its product in the EU until ten years have elapsed from the initial authorization of the reference product in the EU. The ten-year market exclusivity period can be extended to a maximum of eleven years if, during the first eight years of those ten years, the marketing authorization holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to their authorization, are held to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies. There is no guarantee that a product will be considered by the EMA to be an innovative medicinal product, and products may not qualify for data exclusivity. Even if a product is considered to be an innovative medicinal product so that the innovator gains the prescribed period of data exclusivity, another company nevertheless could also market another version of the product if such company obtained marketing authorization based on an MAA with a complete independent and data package of pharmaceutical tests, preclinical tests and clinical trials.

Pediatric studies and exclusivity

Prior to obtaining a marketing authorization in the EU, applicants must demonstrate compliance with all measures included in an EMA-approved pediatric investigation plan, or PIP, covering all subsets of the pediatric population, unless the EMA has granted a product-specific waiver, a class waiver, or a deferral for one or more of the measures included in the PIP. The respective requirements for all marketing authorization procedures are laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006, the so-called Pediatric Regulation. This requirement also applies when a company wants to add a new indication, pharmaceutical form or route of administration for a medicine that is already authorized. The Pediatric Committee of the EMA, or PDCO, may grant deferrals for some medicines, allowing a company to delay development of the medicine for children until there is enough information to demonstrate its effectiveness and safety in adults. The PDCO may also grant waivers when development of a medicine for children is not needed or is not appropriate, such as for diseases that only affect the elderly population. Before an MAA can be filed, or an existing marketing authorization can be amended, the EMA determines that companies actually comply with the agreed studies and measures listed in each relevant PIP. If an applicant obtains a marketing authorization in all EU Member States, or a marketing authorization granted in the centralized procedure by the European Commission, and the study results for the pediatric population are included in the product information, even when negative, the medicine is then eligible for an additional six-month period of qualifying patent protection through extension of the term of the Supplementary Protection Certificate or SPC, provided an application for such extension is made at the same time as filing the SPC application for the product, or at any point up to two years before the SPC expires, even where the trial results are negative. In the case of orphan medicinal products, a two year extension of the orphan market exclusivity may be available. This pediatric reward is subject to specific conditions and is not automatically available when data in compliance with the PIP are developed and submitted.

Orphan drug designation and exclusivity

The criteria for designating an “orphan medicinal product” in the EU are similar in principle to those in the United States. In the EU a medicinal product may be designated as orphan if (1) it is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition; (2) either (a) such condition affects no more than five in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) the product, without the benefits derived from orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the EU to justify the necessary investment in its development; and (3) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of such condition authorized for marketing in the EU, or if such a method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition. Orphan medicinal products are eligible for financial incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers and are, upon grant of a marketing authorization, entitled to ten years of market exclusivity for the approved therapeutic indication. During this ten-year orphan market exclusivity period, no marketing authorization application shall be accepted, and no marketing authorization shall be granted for a similar medicinal product for the same indication. A “similar medicinal product” is defined as a medicinal product containing a similar active substance or substances as contained in an authorized orphan medicinal product, and which is intended for the same therapeutic indication. An orphan product can also obtain an additional two years of market exclusivity in the EU for pediatric studies conducted in compliance with a PIP. The ten-year market exclusivity may be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the product no longer meets the criteria for orphan designation, for example, if the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity. Additionally, marketing authorization may be granted to a similar product for the same indication at any time if (i) the second applicant can establish that its product, although similar, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior to the authorized orphan product; (ii) the marketing authorization holder for the authorized orphan product consents to a second orphan medicinal product application; or (iii) the marketing authorization holder for the authorized orphan product cannot supply enough orphan medicinal product.

28

Regulatory requirements after a marketing authorization has been obtained

If an authorization for a medicinal product in the EU is obtained, the holder of the marketing authorization is required to comply with a range of requirements applicable to the manufacturing, marketing, promotion and sale of medicinal products. These include:

•
Compliance with the EU’s stringent pharmacovigilance or safety reporting rules must be ensured. These rules can impose post-authorization studies and additional monitoring obligations.

•
The manufacturing of authorized medicinal products, for which a separate manufacturer’s license is mandatory, must also be conducted in strict compliance with the applicable EU laws, regulations and guidance, including Directive 2001/83/EC, Directive 2003/94/EC and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004. These requirements include compliance with EU cGMP standards when manufacturing medicinal products and active pharmaceutical ingredients, including the manufacture of active pharmaceutical ingredients outside of the EU with the intention to import the active pharmaceutical ingredients into the EU.

•
The marketing and promotion of authorized drugs, including industry-sponsored continuing medical education and advertising directed toward the prescribers of drugs and/or the general public, are strictly regulated in the EU. Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medicines is prohibited across the EU.

The aforementioned EU rules are generally applicable in the European Economic Area, or EEA, which consists of the EU Member States, plus Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland.

Brexit and the regulatory framework in the United Kingdom

On June 23, 2016, the electorate in the United Kingdom, or UK, voted in favor of leaving the EU, commonly referred to as Brexit, and the UK formally left the EU on January 31, 2020. There was a transition period during which EU pharmaceutical laws continued to apply to the UK, which expired on December 31, 2020. However, the EU and the UK have concluded a trade and cooperation agreement, or TCA, which was provisionally applicable since January 1, 2021 and has been formally applicable since May 1, 2021. The TCA includes specific provisions concerning pharmaceuticals, which include the mutual recognition of GMP, inspections of manufacturing facilities for medicinal products and GMP documents issued, but does not provide for wholesale mutual recognition of UK and EU pharmaceutical regulations. At present, Great Britain has implemented EU legislation on the marketing, promotion and sale of medicinal products through the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 (as amended) (under the Northern Ireland Protocol, the EU regulatory framework currently continues to apply in Northern Ireland). Except in respect of the new EU Clinical Trials Regulation, the regulatory regime in Great Britain for medicines therefore largely aligns with EU regulations, however, it is possible that these regimes will diverge more significantly in the future now that Great Britain’s regulatory system is independent from the EU and the TCA does not provide for mutual recognition of UK and EU pharmaceutical legislation.

On February 27, 2023, the UK government and the European Commission announced a political agreement in principle to replace the Northern Ireland Protocol with a new set of arrangements, known as the "Windsor Framework." This new framework fundamentally changes the existing system under the Northern Ireland Protocol, including with respect to the regulation of medicinal products in the UK. In particular, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, or MHRA, the UK medicines regulator, will be responsible for approving all medicinal products destined for the UK market (i.e., Great Britain and Northern Ireland), and the EMA will no longer have any role in approving medicinal products destined for Northern Ireland. A single UK-wide MA will be granted by the MHRA for all medicinal products to be sold in the UK, enabling products to be sold in a single pack and under a single authorization throughout the UK. The Windsor Framework was approved by the European Union-United Kingdom Joint Committee on March 24, 2023, and the UK government and the EU will therefore enact legislative measures to bring it into law. On June 9, 2023, the MHRA announced that the medicines aspects of the Windsor Framework will apply starting on January 1, 2025.

Government regulation of the processing of personal data collected outside of the United States

If we continue to conduct ongoing or future clinical trials in the EEA and UK, we will continue to be subject to additional data protection restrictions. The collection and use of personal data in the EEA, is governed by the General Data Protection Regulation, or the GDPR, which became effective on May 25, 2018. The GDPR applies to the processing of personal data of data subjects in the EEA by any company established in the EEA and to companies established outside the EEA to the extent they process personal data in connection with the offering of goods or services to data subjects in the EEA or the monitoring of the behavior of data subjects in the EEA. The GDPR sets forth data protection obligations for data controllers of personal data, including stringent requirements relating to notifying data subjects about how their personal data are being handled and how they can exercise their data protection rights, ensuring there is a valid legal basis to process personal data, and condition to process special categories of personal data (if this is consent, the requirements for obtaining consent carry a higher threshold), requirements to conduct data protection impact assessments for certain “high risk” processing, requirements to appoint a data protection officer where sensitive personal data are processed on a “large scale,” limitations on retention of personal data, mandatory data breach notification in certain circumstances, requirements to ensure appropriate technical and organizational measures are in place to safeguard personal data, and “privacy by design” requirements, and also creates direct obligations on service providers acting as data processors.

Failure to comply with the requirements of the GDPR and the related national data protection laws of the EEA, which may deviate slightly from the GDPR, may result in fines of up to 4% of a company’s global revenues for the preceding financial year, or €20,000,000,

29

whichever is greater. Moreover, the GDPR grants data subjects the right to claim material and non-material damages resulting from infringement of the GDPR. Given the breadth and depth of changes in data protection obligations, maintaining compliance with the GDPR will require significant time, resources and expense, and we may be required to put in place additional controls and processes to ensure compliance with the new data protection rules. Further to the UK’s exit from the EU on January 31, 2020, the GDPR ceased to apply in the UK but the UK incorporated the GDPR (as it existed on December 31, 2020 but subject to certain UK specific amendments) into UK law, referred to as the UK GDPR. The UK GDPR and the UK Data Protection Act 2018 set forth the UK’s data protection regime, which is independent from but currently still aligned to the EU’s GDPR. Non-compliance with the UK GDPR may result in monetary penalties of up to £17.5 million or 4% of worldwide revenue, whichever is higher.

In addition, we may be unable to transfer personal data from Europe and other jurisdictions to the United States or other countries due to data localization requirements or limitations on cross-border data flows. Europe and other jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring data to be localized or limiting the transfer of personal data to other countries. In particular, the EEA and the UK have significantly restricted the transfer of personal data to countries whose privacy laws it believes are inadequate, including the United States in certain circumstances, unless a derogation exists or adequate international transfer safeguards are put in place (for example, the European Commission approved Standard Contractual Clauses, and the UK International Data Transfer Agreement/Addendum) and transfer impact assessments carried out. Further, regulators and legislators in the U.S. are increasingly scrutinizing and restricting certain personal data transfers and transactions involving foreign countries. For example, Executive Order 14117, Preventing Access to Americans’ Bulk Sensitive Personal Data and United States Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern, as implemented by Department of Justice regulations issued in December 2024, prohibits data brokerage transactions involving certain sensitive personal data categories, including health data, genetic data, and biospecimens, to countries of concern, including China. The regulations also restrict certain investment agreements, employment agreements and vendor agreements involving such data and countries of concern, absent specified cybersecurity controls. Other jurisdictions may adopt similarly stringent interpretations of their data localization and cross-border data transfer laws. If we are unable to transfer personal data from the EEA, the UK, or other jurisdictions to the United States, or if the requirements for a legally-compliant transfer are too onerous, we could face significant adverse consequences, including by limiting our ability to conduct clinical trial activities in Europe and elsewhere, the interruption or degradation of our operations, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions (such as Europe) at significant expense, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and penalties, the inability to transfer data and work with partners, vendors and other third parties, and injunctions against our processing or transferring of personal data necessary to operate our business.

Human Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2025, we had 192 full-time employees. 34% of our employees have M.D. or Ph.D. degrees. Within our workforce, 80% of employees are engaged in research and development and 20% are engaged in business development, finance, legal, and general management and administration. None of our employees are represented by labor unions or covered by collective bargaining agreements. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

We believe that our people are among our greatest assets and that a diverse and inclusive organization is more innovative and higher performing. We are committed to providing an inclusive, diverse and equitable environment for all employees, and creating an inclusive and collaborative culture that welcomes our differences and creates a safe space for employees to voice their different perspectives.

We are not only focused on recruiting top talent from a diverse range of backgrounds, industries and experiences, but also focused on retaining, developing and promoting our current employees. We maintain a robust onboarding program to ensure all new hires are grounded in our business and culture and we conduct periodic talent reviews to identify high performing and high potential talent within the organization. This data is used to inform specific development opportunities for current and future leaders, create leadership training opportunities, drive meaningful development conversations and enable succession planning for key roles. In addition to our broader talent strategy, we also foster an environment of continuous feedback through our quarterly check-in process where managers and employees share feedback and discuss development opportunities. We believe this combined approach to employee development drives a culture and environment where employees can thrive.

We regularly host company-wide sessions (virtual and onsite) where our leaders share updates on corporate initiatives and business strategy, and where our employees share scientific breakthroughs, celebrate development milestones, and recognize each other’s contributions and accomplishments. Instead of an annual employee survey, we conduct several pulse checks per year to create a nimbler feedback-to-action loop, allowing us to respond to employee sentiment in a timelier fashion. These employee surveys help us measure employee engagement and inform future talent initiatives.

Corporate Information

We were incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware on May 4, 2015 under the name Allostery, Inc. In December 2015, we changed our name to Relay Therapeutics, Inc. Our principal corporate office is located at 60 Hampshire Street, Cambridge, MA 02139, and our telephone number is (617) 370-8837. Our website address is www.relaytx.com. Our website and the information contained on, or that can be accessed through, the website will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference in, and are not considered part of, this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

30

Available Information

Our website address is www.relaytx.com. Our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, including exhibits, proxy and information statements and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Sections 13(a), 14, and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, are available through the "Investors & Media" portion of our website free of charge as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC. Information on our website is not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K or any of our other filings with the SEC unless specifically incorporated herein or therein by reference. In addition, our filings with the SEC may be accessed through the SEC’s Interactive Data Electronic Applications system at www.sec.gov. All statements made in any of our filings with the SEC or documents available on our website, including all forward-looking statements or information, are made as of the date of the document in which the statement is included, and we do not assume or undertake any obligation to update any of those statements or documents unless we are required to do so by law.

Our code of conduct, corporate governance guidelines and the charters of our Audit Committee, Research and Development Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee are available through the “Investors & Media” portion of our website.